出 处:《中国医疗器械信息》2023年第16期179-181,共3页China Medical Device Information
摘 要:目的:探究细节管理在手术室器械准备差错率和零部件遗失率中的影响分析。方法:选择2021年2月~2022年2月本院手术室器械360套,依据不同管理方式划分成观察组(细节管理)及对照组(传统管理),各180套。比较分析两组的满意度、管理质量评分、零部件遗失率和准备差错率,手术室器械细菌监测结果、清洗合格率等情况。结果:观察组的管理技巧、应急能力、交接步骤、服务态度均明显高于对照组,差异有意义(P<0.05);观察组手术室器械管理护士对管理满意度9名(90.00%)明显高于对照组的7名(70.00%),差异有意义(P<0.05);观察组的手术室器械完好率175套(97.22%)明显高于对照组的155套(86.11%),观察组零部件遗失率低于对照组的18套(10.00%),准备差错率3套(1.67%)低于对照组的27套(15.00%),差异有意义(P<0.05);观察组的物体表面、空气、工作人员手细菌监测结果均优于对照组,差异有意义(P<0.05);观察组的手术室器械清洗合格率170套(94.44%)明显高于对照组的140套(77.78%),差异有意义(P<0.05)。结论:针对手术室器械,通过采用细节管理的方式,可提升手术室器械整体管理质量和管理后的满意程度,提升器械清洗合格率及完好率,降低零部件遗失率以及手术室器械准备差错率,规范手术室对器械的正确保管和使用,提升重复使用手术器械的清洗质量、临床上的清洗合格率,同时能够提升手术器械使用寿命。Objective:To explore the analysis of the impact of detail management on the error rate of operating room equipment preparation and parts missing rate.Methods:From February 2021 to February 2022,360 sets of operating room instruments in our hospital were divided into observation group(detail management)and control group(traditional management)according to different management methods,180 sets in each group.The two groups were compared and analyzed in terms of satisfaction,management quality score,component loss rate and preparation error rate,bacterial monitoring results of operating room instruments,and qualified cleaning rate.Results:The management skills,emergency response ability,handover procedures and service attitude of the observation group were significantly higher than those of the control group(P<0.05).In the observation group,9(90.00%)of operating room instrument management nurses were significantly more satisfied with management than 7(70.00%)of the control group,and the difference was significant(P<0.05).The intact rate of operating room instruments in the observation group 175 sets(97.22%)was significantly higher than that in the control group 155 sets(86.11%),and the difference was significant(P<0.05).The parts loss rate of the observation group was lower than that of the control group 18 sets(10.00%),the preparation error rate of 3 sets(1.67%)was lower than that of the control group 27 sets(15.00%),and the difference was significant(P<0.05).The bacterial monitoring results of the surface,air and hands of the observation group were better than those of the control group,and the differences were significant(P<0.05).The qualified rate of instrument cleaning in the observation group 170 sets(94.44%)was significantly higher than that in the control group 140 sets(77.78%),the difference was significant(P<0.05).Conclusion:For operating room instruments,through the use of detailed management,To improve the whole quality of management,operating room equipment management after the satisfaction,improve equip
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...